Welcome to the Piano World Piano ForumsOver 2 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

Scores. For a start, it weeds out the compositions from the improvisations.

Wait... what's wrong with an impro then?

Anyhow, the formal reply for me would be both: If you have a composition that's for more than 1 instrument (piano) then any pianist would have a bit of trouble thinking of what's going on in there. This is a job for other composers, and not many I know can use their inner ear that well anyways... So a recording IS curcial.

Same goes for scores... A score will give a much better understanding of what's going on. And it's really helpful to see what's going on in a very slow and analytical manner, rather than taking a mental 'photograph' of what you're listening to, in order to offer some feedback later on.

___________________________

One should also be aware of the situation each composer is in: One may want to offer the score, because the recording is for sale. Another may want to release the recording, because the score is for sale. Etc...

Apart from anything else, it's difficult to comment on a recording other that "I enjoyed that! Well done!" (which, I suppose, is all that many people submitting recorded improvisations want to hear anyway:-)

In my view a recording is what an audience will hear, so in terms of evaluating a piece for dramatic impact and to a degree harmonic sophistication I don't need a score. While analysis is useful to see what's going on I don't think it matters in how successful a piece is, because the audience very seldom has access to a score. A piece of music will succeed or fail based on its audience perception and that typically means sans score.

To get to Wombat's comment, if you didn't enjoy it, it doesn't matter what's in the score. As far as improvisations are concerned it's pretty easy to tell when a piece is improvised as there's usually a repeating chord progression involved. For me through composed music will always be much denser regarding content.

Scores. For a start, it weeds out the compositions from the improvisations.

Originally Posted By: Nikolas

Wait... what's wrong with an impro then?. . . If you have a composition that's for more than 1 instrument (piano) then any pianist would have a bit of trouble thinking of what's going on in there. This is a job for other composers, and not many I know can use their inner ear that well anyways... So a recording IS curcial.

I have been pondering this interchange all weekend. Like Mr. Exalted, in my mind there is a clear distinction between a Composition and an Improvisation.

The former is music that is somewhat “formalized”, in that it is finished, complete unto itself, and repeatable by someone other than the originator. Typically, a composition is committed to paper, and that is the primary way it is transferred from composer to performer.

An improvisation, as its name implies, is ad-hoc, extemporaneous, and would seldom, if ever, be repeated note-for-note. (An exception to this might be the transcription of a jazz solo, where the student is attempting to analyze for learning.) The improvisation carries the connotation of being in the moment, and not lasting beyond the “now”.

As for Composers: I believe that REAL Composers, of which there are several on this Forum, need an exceptional command of the musical language, and its tools. I think of Composition as a craft, with all the implied rigor and study and experience that culminates in the mastery of anything. Like a conductor, the composer is an exceptional musician with a bird’s-eye-view of music. With that in mind, I find it difficult to picture a real Composer who cannot look at a relatively tonal score, and immediately “hear” the music. If that ability has not yet been cultivated, then we probably do not yet have a real composer.

Just LoPresti’s opinion, naturally. So, if I have to pick one, I’ll take the score any day.Ed

_________________________
In music, everything one does correctly helps everything else.

Sound is all that matters to me. Whether a piece possesses an approximate visual equivalent, i.e. score, whether it was created slowly over a long time, worked out at an instrument or not, or recorded on the spot using improvisation, or even produced by a computer program doesn't matter. Any other answer would render me inconsistent. So a recording for me.

_________________________
"It is inadvisable to decline a dinner invitation from a plump woman." - Fred Hollows

#1990109 - 11/23/1205:10 PMRe: When you browse the Composer's Lounge, do you prefer...
[Re: Dara]

currawong
6000 Post Club Member
Registered: 05/15/07
Posts: 6025
Loc: Down Under

Originally Posted By: Dara

Currawong,I think that is quite an amazing learned skill which perhaps some others reading here also share. Probably a very tiny, tiny percentage of people that listen to music possess this ability.

Not surprising that most listeners haven't developed the skill. It takes time, and you need to engage with the notation in order to learn how to see what you hear, and hear what you see. More than a few pianists, I've noticed, don't so much read music as decode it - once you've worked out what the notes of a piece are, you memorise it and never look at the score again. And for some purposes that's fine. I've had people say to me "you're lucky you can read music." Well I am, and I appreciate what led me to become a musician. But Luck didn't actually teach me to read music.

As for Composers: I believe that REAL Composers, of which there are several on this Forum...

Quote:

I find it difficult to picture a real Composer who...

Quote:

we probably do not yet have a real composer.

I know this will sound harsh, BBPlayer got there first!

I'm not a mod here or anything, but I strongly feel that such language and such attitude is nothing but worryingly awful.

There's no need for that over here. If you don't agree with Ed, by all means say so and explain why, as I've done in the past and keep doing it. If you want to harass, attack and swear there's plenty of other places to do it, but not here...

EDIT: I've just noticed that BBplayer edited foxes post in which case I'll edit his quote in mine so that it won't show anymore...

Much has been said already! Nikolas is right - it depends on the situation. Sometimes it is nice to follow the score while listening to the recording but equally, it is nice to switch off and concentrate on what you are hearing. I suppose it depends on what you you hope to gain from the experience. If you simply want to hear the music - you dont need a score. Those that say they need to see the score so that they can 'hear' it could just listen to the recording (assuming one is available). However, if you wanted to see how easy it is to play, then you would definately need the score.

Also, if you had to perfom a piece and wanted an indication of tempi etc. then you might need both. Some friends who are asked to perform a piece, will look at the score but wont listen to another persons interpretation in case it informs theirs. Others will devour as many recordings as possible while following the score in order to see how others do it.......